Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    March 10, 2015 3:00pm-3:31pm PDT

3:00 pm
significant expansives. >> let me clarify -- i don't know if there's vacant lots but if there were and you wanted to build a thousand square foot in-law, would would that be over the limit? >> in this neighborhood that's a very interesting neighborhood in many different ways and one way we have something called through lots where you have a single parcel of land starting at one street and goes back to another street say from state street to or kid court and the building pattern is they would build a home on one side of the lot and on the other side would remain as green space essentially rear yard space and so there's a trend of subdividing those lots and i
3:01 pm
believe the bulk of the actual vacant lot and if someone wanted to build a building there greater than 3000 square feet you can still get the yard but if it's over 3000 square feet, you would need to seek a conditional use so only if you are building more than 3000 square feet and so if it were an r 2, and there's a lot of r 2 in this area and they were both 15 hundred square foot units, you would not trigger the conditional use. it's only if it's very very large. >> supervisor yee, does that clarify the issue for you at this time? >> yeah it's more for clarification. it wasn't not to to support this. i was not
3:02 pm
going to not support it. it was just for clarification. >> okay thank you. supervisor wiener? >> i do want to respond to supervisor campos's remarks. i agree that in any neighborhood it's important for the community to have a voice and that's what the conditional use process is for the conditional use process guarantees that the community will have a voice and that's what we're trying to do here if you are fwg if you are going to have a dramatic expansion of a home the community will have a voice nobody in corona heights that i'm aware of was requesting a ban on new housing development or a moratorium no one was saying don't add anything new here they simply wanted conditional use and that's very different from what i've heard
3:03 pm
and again, i just know what i've read and have not been privy to every conversation in terms of a mor tore a. >> if i've misinterpreted i'd be happy to clarify so no more of that type of housing production. those projects in the mission that i believe are at issue, are already to my knowledge, subject to conditional use whether you are building in the upper market or anywhere else when you are building a project that has a number of units in it, it will trigger the square footage you are required and already has to go through conditional use and what's being requested in the mission is not conditional use
3:04 pm
but an actual moratorium and a ban on new on new market produced housing so that's a very very different thing. had neighbors come to me in corona heights and said we want to ban new development in our neighborhood i would have said i respect your view but i respectfully decline i do think it's important to acknowledge that distinction and not to just say well, because we're approving controls in one neighborhood that means any controls that anyone wants in any neighborhood no matter how extreme we have to adopt them and i don't think that's the case we take it case by case and see what makes sense. >> thank you supervisor wiener supervisor campos? >> thank you madam president i hope those that are paying attention to these issues understand yes it's a case by case issue but at the end of
3:05 pm
the days those of us here may try to differentiate things based on technicalities bottom line is that here you have two neighborhoods that are trying to place limits on the kind of development that goes into those neighborhoods. the difference actually between the two neighborhoods right now in terms of where corona heights is and where the mission is, is that we, in my office, have yet to actually introduced a formal proposal for the mission and yet there has been opposition already to something that hasn't even been presented but the reality is that in in each case neighbors want to slow down a certain type of development. in the case of corona heights they want to
3:06 pm
slow down what they perceive to be monster housing developments that's inconsent with the character of that neighborhood in the mission people want to slow down the development of luxury housing. and you may try to differentiate it because each one is unique in its own form but it's driven by the same objective and same goal which is to protect the character of the neighborhood and my point is that whatever the tool that the individual neighborhood wants to utilize, it is appropriate for each neighborhood to want to actually have a a say in what development should look like. that is the point, and i stand by that point and i hope that when the issue of what happens in neighborhoods like the mission comes up before this board of supervisors, that we
3:07 pm
remember what we're doing here today because it is at the end of the day driven by the same objective of protecting the character of these neighborhoods. thank you. >> thank you supervisor campos madam clerk, can you please call the roll. >> on item 19 supervisor kim supervisor kim aye. >> supervisor mar aye. >> supervisor tang aye. >> supervisor wiener aye. >> supervisor yee aye. >> supervisor avalos aye. >> president breed aye. >> supervisor campos aye. >> supervisor christensen aye. >> supervisor cohen aye. >> supervisor farrell aye. >> there are 11 ayes. >> this resolution is adopted unanimously madam clerk can you please call the next item. >> supervisor kim is first up to introduce new business. >> thank you madam clerk i am
3:08 pm
introducing a hearing and a resolution today. first the hearing. as many of you know, we have been talking a lot about fires here in san francisco over the last couple of weeks. most people do not realize that 8 out of ten fires occur in homes and they are also fast as many of you know. they can go from a tiny flame to to total destruction in as little as 3 minutes. they can provide you with the precious extra time you might need to escape the building safely as the as the fire grows larger. with 85 percent of these deaths caused by fires in residential structures every year almost 16 thousand men women and children are also injured and the loss
3:09 pm
of life risk of injury isn't just for residents but our fire fighters are at risk of serious injury. the beginning of 2015 has been a terrible one for many of our fellow san franciscans due to fire. there was one in the mission, the tenderloin and the castro district and caused about 13 $13 million in damage and tragedy ly took the life of one of our residents. we've been working closely with the fire department and building owners. even one life is too many to lose to a fire when we actually have a tool in place tested and
3:10 pm
proven to save lives in homes. between 1989 and 2002 more than 1700 single home occupancy units. since its package and full implementation there has only been one hotel damaged and that hotel was the park hotel now renamed which we discovered later that a. it's too easy to let tragedy strike and fade from our memories. firefighting experts maintain that sprinkler systems are
3:11 pm
simply the best line of defense against the blaze and you are less likely to die in a fire if your resident is equipped with automatic sprinklers. we need to discuss and implement these life saving policies before another tragedy strikes therefore i'm calling with supervisor campos a hearing on residential sprinklers and look forward to working closely with the san francisco fire department and the fire of inspection and of course the community to understand the framework that currently exists in our residential buildings and i'm introducing a resolution today with supervisor mar and supervisor campos calling on the administration to develop a specific plan for the campus so
3:12 pm
community members can understand the timeline of the campus building retrofitting and when the campus will open at city college. earlier this year the civic center campus of city college of san francisco closed suddenly due to an emergency seismic safety concern the friday before classes were scheduled to begin and many of the students didn't find out about the closure until they saw the sign posted on the building door. the esl the esl class provided a vital service for many of our large immigrant communities and the campus offered a computer class to the surrounding tenderloin
3:13 pm
community helping to address the digital divide and having a central city campus is essential for working class families to help prepare for further training and education. i've heard as many as a third of students were unable to continue their education either because they could not afford the cost of transit to another campus far away or they could not fit the commute time into their work schedules as they balance families and other obligations. it's important that city college do what it can to help our dedicated san francisco residents in receiving the best education possible. they still have not
3:14 pm
identified these classrooms and so many students are in limbo a diverse group of community stakeholders including glide church and united players and senior disability action network is calling for the campus to reopen as quickly as possible and to find temporary classes in the neighborhood for all classes disrupted by the by by the closure. >> thank you supervisor kim supervisor mar. >> thank you and thanks to supervisor kim for introducing that and besides her great policy work representing her district i was pleased to see in the chronicle last week that supervisor kim was acknowledged
3:15 pm
as the top choice of fashion in the city she's stylish and also well fitting clothing and they point out your shoe collection as well. today is important for a number of us. i call it round 2 against big soda in san francisco. i see dr. john back there and shape up sf and the broad coalitions that have been fighting for our children and a healthier community. and to fight the the the obesity
3:16 pm
epidemic in our city. as you know we must do more as a city to reduce access to sugary beverages like sodas and energy drinks and you might know our hospitals are already implementing the phasing out of sugary beverages in the vending machines and they are already acknowledging the at the tipping point and acknowledging the harm and impact on a generation of young people in our city and throughout the country and i also wanted to say that as announced by open troop dot org and we're
3:17 pm
hoping to see fast food company and see restaurants really providing more milk in the children's meals and san francisco has is shown we're in the lead and today's legislation is a part of that and also in our city, when we've looked very closely at the data, we know that 1 in 3 san francisco youth will become diabetic in their lifetime -- 1 in 3 and when you look at african-americans and latinos 1 in 2 will develop type 2 diabetes in their lifetimes. our office reported last year that sugary drinks cost us as a city fifty million as a city $50 million and the city governments 26 $26 million a year so there's a negative compact by the over consumption
3:18 pm
of sugary beverages and we're continuing this fight against big soda in 2015 with our coalition with legislation that we think will make our communities healthier and better informed informed. the legislation i'm introducing will prohibit the use of city funds from city departments and contractors from purchasing sugary drinks it doesn't ban vendors or private parties from bringing them but it limits the city and departments and contractors that do business with the city to consume sugary beverages we can't in good faith know the terrible harm these drinks cause and then allow them to be handed out in children's programs or encourage employees to drink them and to provide the
3:19 pm
department of public health and our staff more information about the sale of these harmful products. lastly i'm introducing a resolution to formally endorse senator bill madding's bill as we voted about a year ago sb 203 requiring warning labels to inform consumers of the risks imposed by big sugar's products and this board supported unanimously last year and various ordinances that will limit advertising of sugary drinks on city properties and place warnings on advertisements and i wanted to
3:20 pm
thank our city's public health leaders and organizers for their inspiring work and examples they set for me and other policy makers in our city. it's open truth now dot org thanks the rest i'll submit. >> thank you supervisor mar supervisor tang. >> thank you i'm submitting today draft legislation typically i do not do this but i felt this was a very important way to really start formally a large dialogue that we will be embarking upon with the rest of the community and city. there's a lot of talk earlier in this meeting about housing and how to accommodate more people people to be able to live here in our great city and i think we need to look at all solutions and one of the solutions we've been discussing with the planning department probably for the past year or half a year now has to do with
3:21 pm
the idea of back yard cottages. currently the code allows for the construction of facilities that are ten by ten mostly for garden tool storage so we're looking at expanding that regulation to allow for the construction of accessory dwelling units in rear yards and again we feel all solutions should be looked at especially in the sunset district we have many many homes that have large back yards that could accommodate such facilities. so i really look forward to working with the rest of my colleagues and community members in figuring out how we move forward with this legislation so the rest i submit. thank you. >> thank you supervisor tang supervisor wiener.
3:22 pm
>> thank you very much madam clerk. the first item is an ordinance landmarking the swedish american hall near sanchez if you have not seen it before it's really a beautiful majestic building and fell into partial misuse and it's now being revital ized and it's going to be better and better moving forward with live music and food services and our first step is landmarking the building and it's an exciting step for the neighborhood and for this property and i'm also introducing today legislation briefly described by supervisor mar and i want to thank supervisor mar and supervisor cohen for cosponsoring it. requiring health warnings for
3:23 pm
stationary advertisements like billboards and other signs for sodas and sugary beverages -- quote -- warning drinking beverages with added sugar contributes to to diabetes and tooth decay. we know warning are an important public health strategy and they have worked very well in cigarettes all advertising has to inform consumers about some of some of the diseases cigarettes cause and the same should happen here. we know these drinks are fueling the explosion of type 2 diabetes and other health problems and absolutely as a society need to
3:24 pm
reduce consumption and this legislation will help us to do that it applies to any paper poster or billboard ads posted on any structure whether it's it's a transit structure or a building or vehicle. it doesn't include newspapers magazines or periodicals because those tend to be produced outside of the city and it would be challenging or illegal for us to require that warnings be placed on them and the size will have to be at least 20 percent of the ad space a standard required by the fda on tobacco health warnings and the legislation will be enforced by the department of public health and the goal of the legislation of course is to have compliance and not to collect any fines for violations and do not want to create any burdens on any of our retailers and this
3:25 pm
legislation explicitly states no retailer can be subject to any fine without at least a 30-day warning from public health so if an inspect or goes into a store it will need to be corrected within 30-day and see applies only to advertisements posted after the affected date of the legislations so people are not going to have to tear down existing bill boards and signs and replace them so gradual this will phase in the health warnings on our billboard signs etc.. there is no one approach that is going to help address the growing healthcare problem that sugary drinks are creating in our country we are going to have to take various approaches and one of those approaches is
3:26 pm
education and making sure consumers are receiving good information about the impacts of these drinks and this will help move us in this direction i want to thank my office for working on this legislation and supervisor mar and supervisor cohen office. >> thank you. thank you supervisor wiener supervisor yee . >> thank you madam clerk today i'll be introducing two items. one is a hearing to hear testimony on extending the child care impact fee to residential development and the second item -- well, it's regarding the balboa reservoir site and i've heard from my constituents when it comes to the development of this site. every person i've talked to
3:27 pm
seems to lead to one issue -- we need more information. while i appreciate the efforts that have gone to outreaching the neighbors to date i believe we need to do to do a much better job reaching out to every neighbor and every stakeholder. this 18-acre parcel of land will be one of the bigger developments in the western side of san francisco outside of parkmerced. it's larger than the combination of the 3 of the of the 3 development sites on ocean avenue or the 184 town houses and larger than the proposed and approved buildings on what we call the overlook project, so this is really a big deal for our neighborhood and
3:28 pm
probably for the western side of san francisco i mean there's hardly any development it seems it's all happening in district 7 so for today i'm introducing legislation to create a balboa reservoir citizen's advisory committee. i believe it is important that residents, businesses and education institutions impacted by this site are getting should be getting more information from the city about the project every step of the way and are given a say in the decisions that are made. i envision a citizen's advisory committee a place where everyone can get the most updated information the city has and have the necessary conversations about the development on the site and it will have 9 members representing the neighborhoods businesses and educational
3:29 pm
institutions around the reservoir. the task will be to advice on issues centered around transportation and parking open space and other community benefits and housing options and affordability and the interaction of the project with city college good neighbor policies to serve existing residents of small businesses around the site and finally i believe that this is an opportunity for us to envision something very very positive for our neighborhood and i believe that the only way to achieve that is by having a constant flow of information and to have real neighborhood input. the rest i submit. >> thank you supervisor yee supervisor avalos? >> thank you madam clerk colleagues i have two items for introduction one is a new
3:30 pm
security contract for the mta, a 3-year contract and this is like the the second bite at creating a contract for security for the mta and i for the mta and i think they have done it right and hopefully meet with your approval and the next item i have for introduction is a resolution that follows up on on the controller's recent report identifying 3000 loans in the city that are underwater or near underwater and these are predominantly in the southern and south eastern neighborhoods in san francisco and one of the few strategies for helping struggling homeowners where cdfi's have been able to purchase at risk mortgages from banks, hud and fireman